BoxRec

gilgamesh wrote: ↑19 Dec 2018, 17:43 You can only be as great as those around you at the time you are active in your sport, and by that standard Greb is one of the Greatest of all time, and always will be.

Absolutely agree, Greb is one of top ATGs. I was talking about imaginary fights where greatest from 100 years ago would face current elite which is clearly unfair to former.

caldo2025 wrote: ↑19 Dec 2018, 18:12 Who gives a shat what you did? Screw

X2: screw oogiebe.

ironbeard wrote: ↑19 Oct 2018, 10:20

RKY wrote: ↑19 Oct 2018, 10:15 He's a bit like the Klitchkos in the sense that he didn't really have any great opponents to showcase the extent of his ability until the twilight of his career. His prime was probably round about the time he faced Macklin. His best wins are Lemieux, Jacobs and Canelo (1). I felt he had to stop Canelo to really cement his legacy but he came up short against a great fighter.

X2

x3

caldo2025 wrote: ↑19 Dec 2018, 18:12

oogiebe wrote: ↑18 Dec 2018, 16:49

caldo2025 wrote: ↑18 Dec 2018, 16:45 Anyone that doesn't think that GGG is one of the all time greatest Middleweights in Boxing History is a moron. I'm sure the Mexican contingent who hate GGG because he beat Canelo both times he fought him will chime in with some garbage. GGG is an undefeated fighter and has never been beaten. NEVER. He may fight again and lose now because the judges screwed him out of a legacy that he deserved and in turn will ruin what should have been a flawless record and an incredible career. So I guess we will need to review again when retirement is announced.

Also, I believe that when determining a boxer's greatness, these fights at the end of a career and past prime fights still need to count when considering greatness. They shouldn't just be eliminated because they are considered old. Boxers can do damage to their historical placement by sticking around too long. You can't unsee some things. Some luckily have years and years of epic fights that minimize the ugly losses at the end like Sugar Ray and Iron Mike but other boxers that didn't have those big FOY type fights have less of a safety net to work with IMO.

As soon as you said "...is a moron" I stopped reading your post.

Who gives a shat what you did? Screw

I understand but not justify all this grudge against people who's just writing some general, even obvious common sense.

Don't wanna start flames, but this GGG is just a dangerous-enough boxer with a great amateur career and a considerable knock-out percentage, considering his relatively-little amount of fights and the not-so-irresistible quality of his opposition.

Scanning both his amateur and pro career, he's hardly worth a Rigondeaux, as I might have stated earlier (repetita iuvant), and rating his technical baggage and mastery, he's way below the great Cuban.

I doubt that he could have withstanded a tough, relentless, tall powerpuncher like Pavlik, or a vicious, fast & furios guy like Jermain Taylor, both being at their peak.

That said, I might be wrong of course, but go easy on me and anyone else respectful, I don't believe I'm a messiah or a moderator, but take it easy, alright?

GGG might figure in an all-time top-20, or, most likely in a more responsible and cultured top-30... the guy's an honest craftsman as a pro, but far from figuring in any respectable, rather brief p4p-greatest list.

As far as I'm concerned, he could even be some Soviet-nostalgic hypejob, more than an outstanding all-timer: he's light years behind Monzon or Hagler...

So, again: take it easy please, alright?

Jacopodb wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 05:18 I doubt that he could have withstanded a tough, relentless, tall powerpuncher like Pavlik, or a vicious, fast & furios guy like Jermain Taylor, both being at their peak.

One-dimensional Pavlik would be an easy work for GGG. Taylor would probably be a tougher fight for a few rounds, but Golovkin would achieve what Pavlik, Froch and even Abraham did.

An impossible question to answer..there are so many greats to chose from .. ggg has been the best around of late... he's opposition he's fought hasn't been greatest but that's not his fault.. I've never liked these who's the best cos unless they actually get in the ring youl never truly know

Jacopodb wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 05:18

caldo2025 wrote: ↑19 Dec 2018, 18:12

oogiebe wrote: ↑18 Dec 2018, 16:49
As soon as you said "...is a moron" I stopped reading your post.

Who gives a shat what you did? Screw

I understand but not justify all this grudge against people who's just writing some general, even obvious common sense.

Don't wanna start flames, but this GGG is just a dangerous-enough boxer with a great amateur career and a considerable knock-out percentage, considering his relatively-little amount of fights and the not-so-irresistible quality of his opposition.

Scanning both his amateur and pro career, he's hardly worth a Rigondeaux, as I might have stated earlier (repetita iuvant), and rating his technical baggage and mastery, he's way below the great Cuban.

I doubt that he could have withstanded a tough, relentless, tall powerpuncher like Pavlik, or a vicious, fast & furios guy like Jermain Taylor, both being at their peak.

That said, I might be wrong of course, but go easy on me and anyone else respectful, I don't believe I'm a messiah or a moderator, but take it easy, alright?

GGG might figure in an all-time top-20, or, most likely in a more responsible and cultured top-30... the guy's an honest craftsman as a pro, but far from figuring in any respectable, rather brief p4p-greatest list.

As far as I'm concerned, he could even be some Soviet-nostalgic hypejob, more than an outstanding all-timer: he's light years behind Monzon or Hagler...

So, again: take it easy please, alright?

Buddy, you’re in the wrong place to ask for us to be easy. These chumps are relentless. I on the other hand, like your style. Your opinion on this one is pretty whacky but at least you told how you felt.

To put Rigo in a conversation with GGG historically is not even close to fair. GGG has not only never lost or been on the canvas, he’s never even been hurt for that matter. Rigo has been knocked down in most of his fights and quit inside the ring.

So you people that hate GGG, don’t be ridiculous with your comparisons. The guy deserves credit because he’s been probably the only boxer that tried to do it right. He wanted to fight the best. He was avoided and had little to work with but when he got in with quality, he beat everyone that tried. It’s sad that boxing fans can’t give in to their pride and just give the guy his due. It’s not like he’s a Charlo yapping like a fool. GGG is respectful and down to earth and has been great for this game. The poor guy got screwed out of his legacy so can’t you just let him have what he deserves. He’s a great champion and all time great.

To say GGG isn't even Pavlik nor Taylor level(physical at that) is to have some personal hangup. Can't even have a discussion if we can't agree he's at least that level.

Blodhemn wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 20:16 To say GGG isn't even Pavlik nor Taylor level(physical at that) is to have some personal hangup. Can't even have a discussion if we can't agree he's at least that level.

He is past their level IMHO. No contest.

boxing_rocks wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 13:24

Jacopodb wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 05:18 I doubt that he could have withstanded a tough, relentless, tall powerpuncher like Pavlik, or a vicious, fast & furios guy like Jermain Taylor, both being at their peak.

One-dimensional Pavlik would be an easy work for GGG. Taylor would probably be a tougher fight for a few rounds, but Golovkin would achieve what Pavlik, Froch and even Abraham did.

Pavlik hit no lighter than naturally lighter-structured-than-GGG Canelo, and had a considerable reach-advantage (by "considerable" I don't mean "fan's perspective-considerable", just "considerable"...).

Taylor was maybe just too fast for GGG. A close fight anyway, I'll grant you that; by the way, you never know...

This GGG still doesn't convince me, nor do his fans.

You post too seems pretty much in line with GGG's cheerleaders tho.

caldo2025 wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 19:30

Jacopodb wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 05:18

caldo2025 wrote: ↑19 Dec 2018, 18:12

Who gives a shat what you did? Screw

I understand but not justify all this grudge against people who's just writing some general, even obvious common sense.

Don't wanna start flames, but this GGG is just a dangerous-enough boxer with a great amateur career and a considerable knock-out percentage, considering his relatively-little amount of fights and the not-so-irresistible quality of his opposition.

Scanning both his amateur and pro career, he's hardly worth a Rigondeaux, as I might have stated earlier (repetita iuvant), and rating his technical baggage and mastery, he's way below the great Cuban.

I doubt that he could have withstanded a tough, relentless, tall powerpuncher like Pavlik, or a vicious, fast & furios guy like Jermain Taylor, both being at their peak.

That said, I might be wrong of course, but go easy on me and anyone else respectful, I don't believe I'm a messiah or a moderator, but take it easy, alright?

GGG might figure in an all-time top-20, or, most likely in a more responsible and cultured top-30... the guy's an honest craftsman as a pro, but far from figuring in any respectable, rather brief p4p-greatest list.

As far as I'm concerned, he could even be some Soviet-nostalgic hypejob, more than an outstanding all-timer: he's light years behind Monzon or Hagler...

So, again: take it easy please, alright?

Buddy, you’re in the wrong place to ask for us to be easy. These chumps are relentless. I on the other hand, like your style. Your opinion on this one is pretty whacky but at least you told how you felt.

To put Rigo in a conversation with GGG historically is not even close to fair. GGG has not only never lost or been on the canvas, he’s never even been hurt for that matter. Rigo has been knocked down in most of his fights and quit inside the ring.

So you people that hate GGG, don’t be ridiculous with your comparisons. The guy deserves credit because he’s been probably the only boxer that tried to do it right. He wanted to fight the best. He was avoided and had little to work with but when he got in with quality, he beat everyone that tried. It’s sad that boxing fans can’t give in to their pride and just give the guy his due. It’s not like he’s a Charlo yapping like a fool. GGG is respectful and down to earth and has been great for this game. The poor guy got screwed out of his legacy so can’t you just let him have what he deserves. He’s a great champion and all time great.

I guess I don't like your style as much as you like mine.

As much as I must stay respectful, pointing out that I'm no fan of anyone or anything (I just respect competence), I must state, as it's pretty obvious but still unread by myself in this context, that GGG's not a happy era for middleweights: the times of Monzon, Hagler, and even Minter, are sadly gone.

Any boxer at least at Sergio Martinez' level (proficient, I reckon) would eat good GGG alive. A dangerous outsider, I can see it, but not an all-timer. Maybe in an all-time-middleweight-top-30 (very, very "generously" -or ignorantly-), but he would be in an above-named-weight class-top-20 more for the stink of his farts than for his boxing skills.
Forget any respectable p4p list... Soviet crap.

P. S.: Lomachenko, at a p4p level, would dismantle GGG. A solid spank. No shame for old Rigondeaux (still light-years ahead of GGG), losing to Loma.

Jacopodb wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 17:38

caldo2025 wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 19:30

Jacopodb wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 05:18

I understand but not justify all this grudge against people who's just writing some general, even obvious common sense.

Don't wanna start flames, but this GGG is just a dangerous-enough boxer with a great amateur career and a considerable knock-out percentage, considering his relatively-little amount of fights and the not-so-irresistible quality of his opposition.

Scanning both his amateur and pro career, he's hardly worth a Rigondeaux, as I might have stated earlier (repetita iuvant), and rating his technical baggage and mastery, he's way below the great Cuban.

I doubt that he could have withstanded a tough, relentless, tall powerpuncher like Pavlik, or a vicious, fast & furios guy like Jermain Taylor, both being at their peak.

That said, I might be wrong of course, but go easy on me and anyone else respectful, I don't believe I'm a messiah or a moderator, but take it easy, alright?

GGG might figure in an all-time top-20, or, most likely in a more responsible and cultured top-30... the guy's an honest craftsman as a pro, but far from figuring in any respectable, rather brief p4p-greatest list.

As far as I'm concerned, he could even be some Soviet-nostalgic hypejob, more than an outstanding all-timer: he's light years behind Monzon or Hagler...

So, again: take it easy please, alright?

Buddy, you’re in the wrong place to ask for us to be easy. These chumps are relentless. I on the other hand, like your style. Your opinion on this one is pretty whacky but at least you told how you felt.

To put Rigo in a conversation with GGG historically is not even close to fair. GGG has not only never lost or been on the canvas, he’s never even been hurt for that matter. Rigo has been knocked down in most of his fights and quit inside the ring.

So you people that hate GGG, don’t be ridiculous with your comparisons. The guy deserves credit because he’s been probably the only boxer that tried to do it right. He wanted to fight the best. He was avoided and had little to work with but when he got in with quality, he beat everyone that tried. It’s sad that boxing fans can’t give in to their pride and just give the guy his due. It’s not like he’s a Charlo yapping like a fool. GGG is respectful and down to earth and has been great for this game. The poor guy got screwed out of his legacy so can’t you just let him have what he deserves. He’s a great champion and all time great.

I guess I don't like your style as much as you like mine.

As much as I must stay respectful, pointing out that I'm no fan of anyone or anything (I just respect competence), I must state, as it's pretty obvious but still unread by myself in this context, that GGG's not a happy era for middleweights: the times of Monzon, Hagler, and even Minter, are sadly gone.

Any boxer at least at Sergio Martinez' level (proficient, I reckon) would eat good GGG alive. A dangerous outsider, I can see it, but not an all-timer. Maybe in an all-time-middleweight-top-30 (very, very "generously" -or ignorantly-), but he would be in an above-named-weight class-top-20 more for the stink of his farts than for his boxing skills.
Forget any respectable p4p list... Soviet crap.

Sorry, but you may want to put the floatty arms on and get back in the low end of the community pool with these kinds of comments. What the novice boxing mind doesn't understand is that it's easy and simple minded to categorize a whole weight class as weak when what you never considered is the fact that GGG's excellence as a boxer is the major reason why there's no competition at the weight. He's so much better than everyone else but the weak minded people call it a weak weight class instead of pointing out that the only reason that the weight class is weak is because this kid is so damn good that he knocks out everyone he has had to except for a couple.

You point out Sergio, Hagler, Monzone and Minter. The ONLY one that you could have any kind of argument with is Hagler and what happened there? A 147 pound fighter moved up in weight after retiring for almost 3 years and beat him. The ONLY signature fights Hagler ever had were against career welterweights. Please don't pull a John "the Beast" Mugabi on me right now. Is that the top of the heap of Hagler defenses?

The view on Hagler is mostly nostalgic and i do it too because i loved him as well but he was a VERY limited fighter. GGG vs. Hagler wouldn't have been close. GGG's jab is the difference. There's never been a MW with a jab like his. All Hagler had was a jaw and i'd take GGG's jaw over anyones.

caldo2025 wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 18:24

Jacopodb wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 17:38

caldo2025 wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 19:30

Buddy, you’re in the wrong place to ask for us to be easy. These chumps are relentless. I on the other hand, like your style. Your opinion on this one is pretty whacky but at least you told how you felt.

To put Rigo in a conversation with GGG historically is not even close to fair. GGG has not only never lost or been on the canvas, he’s never even been hurt for that matter. Rigo has been knocked down in most of his fights and quit inside the ring.

So you people that hate GGG, don’t be ridiculous with your comparisons. The guy deserves credit because he’s been probably the only boxer that tried to do it right. He wanted to fight the best. He was avoided and had little to work with but when he got in with quality, he beat everyone that tried. It’s sad that boxing fans can’t give in to their pride and just give the guy his due. It’s not like he’s a Charlo yapping like a fool. GGG is respectful and down to earth and has been great for this game. The poor guy got screwed out of his legacy so can’t you just let him have what he deserves. He’s a great champion and all time great.

I guess I don't like your style as much as you like mine.

As much as I must stay respectful, pointing out that I'm no fan of anyone or anything (I just respect competence), I must state, as it's pretty obvious but still unread by myself in this context, that GGG's not a happy era for middleweights: the times of Monzon, Hagler, and even Minter, are sadly gone.

Any boxer at least at Sergio Martinez' level (proficient, I reckon) would eat good GGG alive. A dangerous outsider, I can see it, but not an all-timer. Maybe in an all-time-middleweight-top-30 (very, very "generously" -or ignorantly-), but he would be in an above-named-weight class-top-20 more for the stink of his farts than for his boxing skills.
Forget any respectable p4p list... Soviet crap.

Sorry, but you may want to put the floatty arms on and get back in the low end of the community pool with these kinds of comments. What the novice boxing mind doesn't understand is that it's easy and simple minded to categorize a whole weight class as weak when what you never considered is the fact that GGG's excellence as a boxer is the major reason why there's no competition at the weight. He's so much better than everyone else but the weak minded people call it a weak weight class instead of pointing out that the only reason that the weight class is weak is because this kid is so damn good that he knocks out everyone he has had to except for a couple.

You point out Sergio, Hagler, Monzone and Minter. The ONLY one that you could have any kind of argument with is Hagler and what happened there? A 147 pound fighter moved up in weight after retiring for almost 3 years and beat him. The ONLY signature fights Hagler ever had were against career welterweights. Please don't pull a John "the Beast" Mugabi on me right now. Is that the top of the heap of Hagler defenses?

The view on Hagler is mostly nostalgic and i do it too because i loved him as well but he was a VERY limited fighter. GGG vs. Hagler wouldn't have been close. GGG's jab is the difference. There's never been a MW with a jab like his. All Hagler had was a jaw and i'd take GGG's jaw over anyones.

Usyk has cleaned out the CW division, but it's a strong division with several very strong fighters. So in that case, a dominant fighter at the top certainly doesn't make the division appear weak, it makes Usyk appear as great as he is.

geronimo wrote: ↑19 Oct 2018, 06:50 For you can be Gennady Golovkin put in the top 10 all time middleweight boxers?

I think so.

oogiebe wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 18:29

caldo2025 wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 18:24

Jacopodb wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 17:38

I guess I don't like your style as much as you like mine.

As much as I must stay respectful, pointing out that I'm no fan of anyone or anything (I just respect competence), I must state, as it's pretty obvious but still unread by myself in this context, that GGG's not a happy era for middleweights: the times of Monzon, Hagler, and even Minter, are sadly gone.

Any boxer at least at Sergio Martinez' level (proficient, I reckon) would eat good GGG alive. A dangerous outsider, I can see it, but not an all-timer. Maybe in an all-time-middleweight-top-30 (very, very "generously" -or ignorantly-), but he would be in an above-named-weight class-top-20 more for the stink of his farts than for his boxing skills.
Forget any respectable p4p list... Soviet crap.

Sorry, but you may want to put the floatty arms on and get back in the low end of the community pool with these kinds of comments. What the novice boxing mind doesn't understand is that it's easy and simple minded to categorize a whole weight class as weak when what you never considered is the fact that GGG's excellence as a boxer is the major reason why there's no competition at the weight. He's so much better than everyone else but the weak minded people call it a weak weight class instead of pointing out that the only reason that the weight class is weak is because this kid is so damn good that he knocks out everyone he has had to except for a couple.

You point out Sergio, Hagler, Monzone and Minter. The ONLY one that you could have any kind of argument with is Hagler and what happened there? A 147 pound fighter moved up in weight after retiring for almost 3 years and beat him. The ONLY signature fights Hagler ever had were against career welterweights. Please don't pull a John "the Beast" Mugabi on me right now. Is that the top of the heap of Hagler defenses?

The view on Hagler is mostly nostalgic and i do it too because i loved him as well but he was a VERY limited fighter. GGG vs. Hagler wouldn't have been close. GGG's jab is the difference. There's never been a MW with a jab like his. All Hagler had was a jaw and i'd take GGG's jaw over anyones.

Usyk has cleaned out the CW division, but it's a strong division with several very strong fighters. So in that case, a dominant fighter at the top certainly doesn't make the division appear weak, it makes Usyk appear as great as he is.

Is the correct answer.

It always seems to be Golovkin or Joshua who people want to anoint as "the best ever" and it was Kovalev before that. Not sure what it is about these three fighters but they seem to attract the "best ever" crowd.

Golovkin has been a good champion and deserves respect but his opposition in the main has been weak which will harm his atg legacy. He won't sit at the top table but he'll be invited to the dinner.

kov wasnt hyped nearly the same, loads of people including a major media poll of 25 'experts' thought 49 year old hopkins would beat and even 'school' him, he was underdog for both ward fights and again expected by many to be totally outclassed , and he was called crude and limited for years. ppl were even saying ggg would beat him and already battered him in sparring!

on the contrary, when it comes to hype ppl just lazily lump him in with guys like ggg, maybe because there both hard punching soviets

jamamb wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 19:05 kov wasnt hyped nearly the same, loads of people including a major media poll of 25 'experts' thought 49 year old hopkins would beat and even 'school' him, he was underdog for both ward fights and again expected by many to be totally outclassed , and he was called crude and limited for years. ppl were even saying ggg would beat him and already battered him in sparring!

on the contrary, when it comes to hype ppl just lazily lump him in with guys like ggg, maybe because there both hard punching soviets

That's a fair point

boxing_rocks wrote: ↑19 Dec 2018, 18:28

gilgamesh wrote: ↑19 Dec 2018, 17:43 You can only be as great as those around you at the time you are active in your sport, and by that standard Greb is one of the Greatest of all time, and always will be.

Absolutely agree, Greb is one of top ATGs. I was talking about imaginary fights where greatest from 100 years ago would face current elite which is clearly unfair to former.

No doubt, way tougher men with way tougher lives and way better stamina are really behind the eight ball!

caldo2025 wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 18:24

Jacopodb wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 17:38

caldo2025 wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 19:30

Buddy, you’re in the wrong place to ask for us to be easy. These chumps are relentless. I on the other hand, like your style. Your opinion on this one is pretty whacky but at least you told how you felt.

To put Rigo in a conversation with GGG historically is not even close to fair. GGG has not only never lost or been on the canvas, he’s never even been hurt for that matter. Rigo has been knocked down in most of his fights and quit inside the ring.

So you people that hate GGG, don’t be ridiculous with your comparisons. The guy deserves credit because he’s been probably the only boxer that tried to do it right. He wanted to fight the best. He was avoided and had little to work with but when he got in with quality, he beat everyone that tried. It’s sad that boxing fans can’t give in to their pride and just give the guy his due. It’s not like he’s a Charlo yapping like a fool. GGG is respectful and down to earth and has been great for this game. The poor guy got screwed out of his legacy so can’t you just let him have what he deserves. He’s a great champion and all time great.

I guess I don't like your style as much as you like mine.

As much as I must stay respectful, pointing out that I'm no fan of anyone or anything (I just respect competence), I must state, as it's pretty obvious but still unread by myself in this context, that GGG's not a happy era for middleweights: the times of Monzon, Hagler, and even Minter, are sadly gone.

Any boxer at least at Sergio Martinez' level (proficient, I reckon) would eat good GGG alive. A dangerous outsider, I can see it, but not an all-timer. Maybe in an all-time-middleweight-top-30 (very, very "generously" -or ignorantly-), but he would be in an above-named-weight class-top-20 more for the stink of his farts than for his boxing skills.
Forget any respectable p4p list... Soviet crap.

Sorry, but you may want to put the floatty arms on and get back in the low end of the community pool with these kinds of comments. What the novice boxing mind doesn't understand is that it's easy and simple minded to categorize a whole weight class as weak when what you never considered is the fact that GGG's excellence as a boxer is the major reason why there's no competition at the weight. He's so much better than everyone else but the weak minded people call it a weak weight class instead of pointing out that the only reason that the weight class is weak is because this kid is so damn good that he knocks out everyone he has had to except for a couple.

You point out Sergio, Hagler, Monzone and Minter. The ONLY one that you could have any kind of argument with is Hagler and what happened there? A 147 pound fighter moved up in weight after retiring for almost 3 years and beat him. The ONLY signature fights Hagler ever had were against career welterweights. Please don't pull a John "the Beast" Mugabi on me right now. Is that the top of the heap of Hagler defenses?

The view on Hagler is mostly nostalgic and i do it too because i loved him as well but he was a VERY limited fighter. GGG vs. Hagler wouldn't have been close. GGG's jab is the difference. There's never been a MW with a jab like his. All Hagler had was a jaw and i'd take GGG's jaw over anyones.

You've obviously never watched hagler, pick whom you will in a mythical fight but he was clearly one of the most complete fighters in boxing history. Maybe the most versatile ever. No weaknesses.

caldo2025 wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 18:24

Jacopodb wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 17:38

caldo2025 wrote: ↑20 Dec 2018, 19:30

Buddy, you’re in the wrong place to ask for us to be easy. These chumps are relentless. I on the other hand, like your style. Your opinion on this one is pretty whacky but at least you told how you felt.

To put Rigo in a conversation with GGG historically is not even close to fair. GGG has not only never lost or been on the canvas, he’s never even been hurt for that matter. Rigo has been knocked down in most of his fights and quit inside the ring.

So you people that hate GGG, don’t be ridiculous with your comparisons. The guy deserves credit because he’s been probably the only boxer that tried to do it right. He wanted to fight the best. He was avoided and had little to work with but when he got in with quality, he beat everyone that tried. It’s sad that boxing fans can’t give in to their pride and just give the guy his due. It’s not like he’s a Charlo yapping like a fool. GGG is respectful and down to earth and has been great for this game. The poor guy got screwed out of his legacy so can’t you just let him have what he deserves. He’s a great champion and all time great.

I guess I don't like your style as much as you like mine.

As much as I must stay respectful, pointing out that I'm no fan of anyone or anything (I just respect competence), I must state, as it's pretty obvious but still unread by myself in this context, that GGG's not a happy era for middleweights: the times of Monzon, Hagler, and even Minter, are sadly gone.

Any boxer at least at Sergio Martinez' level (proficient, I reckon) would eat good GGG alive. A dangerous outsider, I can see it, but not an all-timer. Maybe in an all-time-middleweight-top-30 (very, very "generously" -or ignorantly-), but he would be in an above-named-weight class-top-20 more for the stink of his farts than for his boxing skills.
Forget any respectable p4p list... Soviet crap.

Sorry, but you may want to put the floatty arms on and get back in the low end of the community pool with these kinds of comments. What the novice boxing mind doesn't understand is that it's easy and simple minded to categorize a whole weight class as weak when what you never considered is the fact that GGG's excellence as a boxer is the major reason why there's no competition at the weight. He's so much better than everyone else but the weak minded people call it a weak weight class instead of pointing out that the only reason that the weight class is weak is because this kid is so damn good that he knocks out everyone he has had to except for a couple.

You point out Sergio, Hagler, Monzone and Minter. The ONLY one that you could have any kind of argument with is Hagler and what happened there? A 147 pound fighter moved up in weight after retiring for almost 3 years and beat him. The ONLY signature fights Hagler ever had were against career welterweights. Please don't pull a John "the Beast" Mugabi on me right now. Is that the top of the heap of Hagler defenses?

The view on Hagler is mostly nostalgic and i do it too because i loved him as well but he was a VERY limited fighter. GGG vs. Hagler wouldn't have been close. GGG's jab is the difference. There's never been a MW with a jab like his. All Hagler had was a jaw and i'd take GGG's jaw over anyones.

Good points. It's not nice to have to admit it, but Ray was proved right on the night in that Marvin had begun to slow a little by the time of their clash.

Even so, it did seem ridiculous beforehand that SRL would have any chance to win. I recall an article on Leonard training hard, putting in hours and hours of skipping whilst listening to the Beatles amongst other things, but no one actually came out and said he would win? Most considered it unthinkable, but after the first four rounds doubts began to appear.

I guess we tend to prefer certainty but as this sport keeps reminding us, there's no such thing. This constant uncertainty is one of the reasons why GGGs return to the ring should be fascinating.

Whether you like it or not, Gennady Golovkin is as close to a modern day Marvellous Marvin Hagler as anyone.

By the time he retires, GGG may be considered Hall-of-Fame worthy, but his resume isn’t remotely close (in terms of calibre) to those that are universally regarded as being genuine all-time-greats?

Apart from David Lemieux and Daniel Geale, how many fighters that held any of the legitimate versions of the world middleweight championship has he actually beaten?

I think that GGG is a fantastic fighter, but his resume doesn’t justify the absurd amount of hype and praise that has been lavished upon him.

So why on earth are people granting Gennady Golovkin an honorary rite of passage to “all-time-greatness” based on world title victories over the likes of?

• Dominic Wade
• Willie Monroe Jr.
• Osumanu Adama
• Marco Antonio Rubio
• Curtis Stevens
• Nobuhiro Ishida
• Gabriel Rosado
• Grzegorz Proksa
• Makoto Fuchigami
• Lajuan Simon
• Kassim Ouma
• Kell Brook
• Vanes Martirosyan
• Nilson Julio Tapia
• Milton Nunez

Nearly every single one of these guys were not considered top-ten middleweights (based on ESPN’s and The RING’s divisional rankings) prior to their bouts against Gennady Golovkin and the vast majority of them were also former welterweights/light middleweights.

How many Hall-of-Fame worthy fighters has GGG defeated? And then compare this number to genuine all-time-greats, such as: Sugar Ray Robinson; Sugar Ray Leonard; Roberto Duran; Jack Johnson; Manny Pacquiao; Floyd Mayweather Jr.; Muhammad Ali; Evander Holyfield; etc.

End of thread!

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 20:06

caldo2025 wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 18:24

Jacopodb wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 17:38

I guess I don't like your style as much as you like mine.

As much as I must stay respectful, pointing out that I'm no fan of anyone or anything (I just respect competence), I must state, as it's pretty obvious but still unread by myself in this context, that GGG's not a happy era for middleweights: the times of Monzon, Hagler, and even Minter, are sadly gone.

Any boxer at least at Sergio Martinez' level (proficient, I reckon) would eat good GGG alive. A dangerous outsider, I can see it, but not an all-timer. Maybe in an all-time-middleweight-top-30 (very, very "generously" -or ignorantly-), but he would be in an above-named-weight class-top-20 more for the stink of his farts than for his boxing skills.
Forget any respectable p4p list... Soviet crap.

Sorry, but you may want to put the floatty arms on and get back in the low end of the community pool with these kinds of comments. What the novice boxing mind doesn't understand is that it's easy and simple minded to categorize a whole weight class as weak when what you never considered is the fact that GGG's excellence as a boxer is the major reason why there's no competition at the weight. He's so much better than everyone else but the weak minded people call it a weak weight class instead of pointing out that the only reason that the weight class is weak is because this kid is so damn good that he knocks out everyone he has had to except for a couple.

You point out Sergio, Hagler, Monzone and Minter. The ONLY one that you could have any kind of argument with is Hagler and what happened there? A 147 pound fighter moved up in weight after retiring for almost 3 years and beat him. The ONLY signature fights Hagler ever had were against career welterweights. Please don't pull a John "the Beast" Mugabi on me right now. Is that the top of the heap of Hagler defenses?

The view on Hagler is mostly nostalgic and i do it too because i loved him as well but he was a VERY limited fighter. GGG vs. Hagler wouldn't have been close. GGG's jab is the difference. There's never been a MW with a jab like his. All Hagler had was a jaw and i'd take GGG's jaw over anyones.

You've obviously never watched hagler, pick whom you will in a mythical fight but he was clearly one of the most complete fighters in boxing history. Maybe the most versatile ever. No weaknesses.

For the record I rate Golovkin highly however to call Hagler a very limited fighter is blasphemy. Agree with your comment, he could do it all. He was special, marvellous even.

That misconception is bizarrely widespread. His hl reel video to voodoo Chile has the slickest ko move I've ever seen.

oogiebe wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 18:29

caldo2025 wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 18:24

Jacopodb wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 17:38

I guess I don't like your style as much as you like mine.

As much as I must stay respectful, pointing out that I'm no fan of anyone or anything (I just respect competence), I must state, as it's pretty obvious but still unread by myself in this context, that GGG's not a happy era for middleweights: the times of Monzon, Hagler, and even Minter, are sadly gone.

Any boxer at least at Sergio Martinez' level (proficient, I reckon) would eat good GGG alive. A dangerous outsider, I can see it, but not an all-timer. Maybe in an all-time-middleweight-top-30 (very, very "generously" -or ignorantly-), but he would be in an above-named-weight class-top-20 more for the stink of his farts than for his boxing skills.
Forget any respectable p4p list... Soviet crap.

Sorry, but you may want to put the floatty arms on and get back in the low end of the community pool with these kinds of comments. What the novice boxing mind doesn't understand is that it's easy and simple minded to categorize a whole weight class as weak when what you never considered is the fact that GGG's excellence as a boxer is the major reason why there's no competition at the weight. He's so much better than everyone else but the weak minded people call it a weak weight class instead of pointing out that the only reason that the weight class is weak is because this kid is so damn good that he knocks out everyone he has had to except for a couple.

You point out Sergio, Hagler, Monzone and Minter. The ONLY one that you could have any kind of argument with is Hagler and what happened there? A 147 pound fighter moved up in weight after retiring for almost 3 years and beat him. The ONLY signature fights Hagler ever had were against career welterweights. Please don't pull a John "the Beast" Mugabi on me right now. Is that the top of the heap of Hagler defenses?

The view on Hagler is mostly nostalgic and i do it too because i loved him as well but he was a VERY limited fighter. GGG vs. Hagler wouldn't have been close. GGG's jab is the difference. There's never been a MW with a jab like his. All Hagler had was a jaw and i'd take GGG's jaw over anyones.

Usyk has cleaned out the CW division, but it's a strong division with several very strong fighters. So in that case, a dominant fighter at the top certainly doesn't make the division appear weak, it makes Usyk appear as great as he is.

Usyk had a few sloppy fights and seemed beatable which is why opponents didn't avoid him. Golovkin looked like a beast, so he was blatantly avoided. DiBella said that there was no way he would put Sergio "against that animal". Hearn said about the same regarding Barker when he had a belt. NOBODY was calling Golovkin out.